Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T14:05:59.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dissociable brain correlates for depression, anxiety, dissociation, and somatization in depersonalization-derealization disorder

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2013

Erwin Lemche ,
Simon A. Surguladze ,
Michael J. Brammer ,
Mary L. Phillips ,
Mauricio Sierra ,
Anthony S. David ,
Steven C. R. Williams  and
Vincent P. Giampietro
Erwin Lemche*
Affiliation:
Section of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
Simon A. Surguladze
Affiliation:
Section of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
Michael J. Brammer
Affiliation:
Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
Mary L. Phillips
Affiliation:
Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Mauricio Sierra
Affiliation:
Section of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
Anthony S. David
Affiliation:
Section of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
Steven C. R. Williams
Affiliation:
Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
Vincent P. Giampietro
Affiliation:
Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK
*
*Address for correspondence: Erwin Lemche, PhD, Section of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Box PO69, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College School of Medicine, De Crespigny Park, London SE5 8AF, UK. (Email: erwin.lemche@kcl.ac.uk)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

The cerebral mechanisms of traits associated with depersonalization-derealization disorder (DPRD) remain poorly understood.

Method

Happy and sad emotion expressions were presented to DPRD and non-referred control (NC) subjects in an implicit event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) design, and correlated with self report scales reflecting typical co-morbidities of DPRD: depression, dissociation, anxiety, somatization.

Results

Significant differences between the slopes of the two groups were observed for somatization in the right temporal operculum (happy) and ventral striatum, bilaterally (sad). Discriminative regions for symptoms of depression were the right pulvinar (happy) and left amygdala (sad). For dissociation, discriminative regions were the left mesial inferior temporal gyrus (happy) and left supramarginal gyrus (sad). For state anxiety, discriminative regions were the left inferior frontal gyrus (happy) and parahippocampal gyrus (sad). For trait anxiety, discriminative regions were the right caudate head (happy) and left superior temporal gyrus (sad).

Discussion

The ascertained brain regions are in line with previous findings for the respective traits. The findings suggest separate brain systems for each trait.

Conclusion

Our results do not justify any bias for a certain nosological category in DPRD.

Keywords

Depersonalization-derealization disorderdepressiondifferential regression analysisdissociationfacial expression processingfunctional magnetic resonance imagingsomatization severitystate anxietytrait anxiety

Information

Type
Original Research
Information
CNS Spectrums , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , February 2016 , pp. 35 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Clinical Implications

  • • Depersonalization-derealization disorder is a rare and highly distressing disorder, but depersonalization and derealization symptoms are widespread in psychiatric diseases.

  • • There is currently no established and evidence-based treatment for depersonalization, neither in pharmacotherapy nor in psychotherapy.

  • • Clinicians dispute as to the underlying etiological factors, among which personality dispositions are in consideration.

  • • Investigating the brain substrates of different personality traits in depersonalization-derealization syndrome, this study indicates that these are based on separate brain systems.

  • • Treatment approaches should therefore focus on individual complaints related to personality traits prevailing in individual patients.

Introduction

Clinicians dispute over the nosological categorization and etiology of depersonalization-derealization disorder (DPRD). According to current classification, 1 there are 4 core features that characterize DPRD, namely, estrangements from body experience, from the sense of self, from external reality, and from emotional sensations. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed. (DSM-5) continues to subsume DPRD under dissociative disorders, whereas in the International Classification of Diseases, 10th rev. (ICD-10), a separate nosological category is reserved for DPRD. Pertaining to frequent comorbidities, many expert clinicians, however, believe that depersonalization is an extreme feature of both anxiety or depression,Reference Mula, Pini and Cassano 2 thus linking DPRD to these nosological categories. We decided to ascertain the respective brain bases of these traits to address this problem. To this end, we correlated cerebral response to emotionally positive and negative facial stimuli in DPRD patients, with relevant personality traits separating DPRD and normal controls.

One of the characteristics that has been documented for DPRDReference Yargic, Sar, Tutkun and Alyanak 3 but has been rarely investigated is somatization. Somatization is an enduring trait characterized by complaints about bodily dysregulation, pain, and other physical discomfort. According to the DSM-5 1 list of physical symptoms indicative of somatization, somatization symptoms are frequently associated with depression, anxiety, and feelings of distress.Reference Rief and Auer 4 Together with anxiety and dissociation, somatization plays also a major role in the ensemble of symptoms that follow trauma.Reference van der Kolk, Pelcovitz and Roth 5 The main disorders of somatization—medically unexplained physical symptoms—implicate heightened autonomic arousal and cognitive filtering of bodily symptoms as their bases.Reference Rief and Broadbent 6 Genetic association studies have linked trait somatization (as measured with Rief's SOMS-2 index) significantly to the long alleles of the 5-HTTPLR gene.Reference Hennings, Zill and Rief 7 The anterior ventral precuneus and posterior cingulate gyrus have been identified co-varying with somatization severity.Reference Lemche, Giampietro and Brammer 8 Accordingly, we hypothesized that somatization severity would co-vary with the activation in structures that are part of the pain neuromatrix, and/or are implicated in interoception of gut signals, and are specifically associated with the serotoninergic system (eg, ventral striatum).

The relation of depersonalization to dissociation is also not yet sufficiently clarified by empirical research. Recent findings suggest a strong typical interrelation of dissociation with posttraumatic stress, emotional numbing (a core feature of DPRD), and alexithymia.Reference Frewen, Lanius and Dozois 9 However, both disorders are not entirely congruent, although studies typically report significant association between dissociative experience and DPRD self-report.Reference Mula, Pini and Calugi 10 Neuroimaging studies on trait dissociation are still very scarce, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) results on negative emotional memory have indicated heightened hippocampal and posterior parietal activityReference de Ruiter, Veltman, Phaf and van Dyck 11 in a nonclinical dissociators group. These findings have been corroborated by detection of underlying white matter abnormalities in the temporal lobes in patients with dissociation.Reference Choi, Jeong, Rohan, Polcari and Teicher 12 Given these findings, we anticipated temporal and/or parietal regions to be co-varied with trait dissociative experience in DPRD as compared to normal controls. Recent neuroimaging studies focusing on trauma have, additionally, identified a pattern of corticolimbic emotion modulationReference Lanius, Vermetten and Loewenstein 13 following traumatogenic events. According to Lanius's model, there are parallelisms in emotional overmodulation exerted by prefrontal inhibitory regions upon emotional limbic regions, and respective patterns have been documented both in subgroups of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD)Reference Felmingham, Kemp and Williams 14 and DPRDReference Lemche, Surguladze and Giampietro 15 sufferers.

Depressive states are also typically involved with DPRD, and similarly to anxiety disorders, depersonalization is also a frequent comorbidity in depressive disorders.Reference Mula, Pini and Cassano 2 Because of extensive neuroimaging studies, cerebral bases of depression both as clinical state and measured in research scales are relatively well known. Depression is associated with well-known brain activation patterns that typically involve subgenual cingulate, amygdalar, and prefrontal co-engagement.Reference Mayberg 16 , Reference Phillips, Ladouceur and Drevets 17 In both adults and adolescents, medial prefrontal cortex and subgenual cingulate gyrus are preferentially activated during both normal sadness and pathological depression, and they co-vary with scores on the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). We hypothesized therefore that the regions of the basal forebrain and limbic structures would be correlated with BDI scores.

Among the clinical categories commonly found to be comorbid with DPRD are anxiety disorders. Depersonalization states, in turn, are also frequently found accompanying anxiety disorders.Reference Mula, Pini and Cassano 2 In electrophysiology, both state and trait anxiety are correlated with desynchronized electroencephalography (EEG) patterns, which indicate the presence of increased vigilance due to over-arousal.Reference Knyazev, Savostyanov and Levin 18 Trait anxiety is known to modulate fear responses by altering threat sensitivity, eg, in the basolateral amygdala, prefrontal regions, and posterior cingulate gyrus.Reference Etkin, Klemenhagen and Dudman 19 Previously, state anticipatory anxiety increased brain metabolism in the right superior temporal sulcus and the left anterior cingulate.Reference Chua, Krams, Toni, Passingham and Dolan 20 We therefore also hypothesized these regions as correlation regions with the respective anxiety scales.

We designed a study in which DPRD patients and healthy subjects were shown happy and sad facial expressions in 3 different intensities. Clinical self-report measures were included in correlational analyses with neural responses to identify regions associated with the respective clinical trait. Differential regression analyses then indicated the regions discriminating the DPRD and NC groups by significant differences in regression slopes for the two groups.

Methods

The Institute of Psychiatry Research Ethics Committee endorsed all procedures of the study, which was conducted in compliance with the Helsinki Declaration. 21 All subjects were reimbursed for their participation and gave written informed consent to the scientific use of their data. Primary-diagnosis DPRD patients (mean age, 36.11 ± 2.34 SEM years; education level, 2.22 ± 0.14; 2 = junior college level; N = 9, 4 females) from the Maudsley Hospital, London, and normal control (NC) subjects (mean age, 27.25 ± 1.95 years; education level, 2.58 ± 2.02; N = 12, five females) participated in the experiments. At the time of investigation, patients were treated in a specialized clinic for this diagnosis (ASD and MLP). All patients were diagnosed with DPRD according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. (DSM-IV) criteria by a psychiatrist not involved in the study. DPRD patients were separately invited to participate in the study by the experimenter (EL), who was blind to all medical records. The clinical cut-off level of >70 on the Cambridge Depersonalization Scale (CDS) item version total scale discriminative for DPRDReference Sierra and Berrios 22 was exceeded for all patients (175.77 ± 12.31). Six patients were diagnosed with minor comorbid depression and/or anxiety disorder. Six patients were unmedicated, and 3 received lowest weaning doses of 3 different medications [including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and neuroleptics (paroxetine, fluoxetine, olanzapine)]. The 12 NC subjects were chosen to match sample characteristics of DPRD patients. No specific differences in sociodemographic factors (education, socio-economic status) and gender ratio were found.

Right-handedness was verified with the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory.Reference Oldfield 23 Personality traits relevant for DPRD were assessed using the following self-report forms further to the CDS cutoff for DPRDReference Sierra and Berrios 22 (see above): the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI),Reference Beck, Ward, Mendelson, Mock and Erbaugh 24 the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI),Reference Spielberger 25 the Dissociative Experience Scale (DES),Reference Bernstein-Carlson and Putnam 26 and the Screening for Somatoform Disorders (SOMS).Reference Rief, Hiller and Heuser 27 The questionnaire raw data were used for fMRI correlation images, and for estimation of unique variance proportions and classification specificities for clinical DPRD diagnoses in logistic regression and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) models.

Subjects were presented with 20 facial expression stimuli at 0% (neutral)–50% (mild)–100% (intense) intensities of happy and sad emotion expressions. Separate scans were performed for happy and sad conditions. Subjects were required to determine the sex of the face, ie, an implicit emotion recognition task. Figure 1 depicts the design diagram of the experimental tasks. More detailed information on the task can be found in the online Supplementary Information.

Figure 1

Presentation design for fast implicit facial expression task. Facial expressions were excerpted from the POFA set of photographs, courtesy of Dr. Paul Ekman, professor emeritus University of California at San Francisco (written permission from paul.ekman.com of January 2013).

Gradient echo echoplanar imaging (EPI) data were acquired on a Neurovascular GE Signa 1.5 Tesla system (General Electric, Milwaukee, WI, USA), which was equipped with 40 m/mT high-speed gradients, at Maudsley Hospital, London. A quadrature birdcage headcoil was used for radio frequency (RF) transmission and reception. 180 T2*-weighted images were acquired over 6 minutes for each of the 2 tasks at each of 16 near-axial noncontiguous 7 mm thick planes parallel to the intercommissural (AC-PC) line using the following specifications: TE 40 ms, TR 2000 ms, in-plane resolution 3.44 mm, interslice gap 0.7 mm, flip angle (FA) α 70°, matrix 642, field of view (FOV) 25 cm providing whole brain coverage. During the same session, a high-resolution EPI dataset was acquired with a gradient echo EPI pulse sequence. The structural images were acquired at 43 near-axial 3-mm-thick planes parallel to the AC-PC line: TE 73 ms, TI 180 ms, TR 16,000 ms, in-plane resolution 1.72 mm, interslice gap 0.3 mm, matrix size 1282, FOV 25 cm, FA α 90°. The high resolution EPI dataset was later used to register the fMRI datasets that were acquired from each individual in standard stereotaxic space. The program suite XBAM (http://www.brainmap.it), with mathematical control for signal-to-noise ratio, was used to perform the analysis of fMRI data.

Under the assumption that the subtraction map reflects pure emotion-induced cerebral activation at higher intensity levels, aggregate images of 50–100% of emotional expression were computed after subtracting neutral facial expression activation. The aggregate images were used as a basis for correlation images with clinical trait scales. The aggregate activation maps and correlation images served as a basis for ascertaining regions in which the two groups significantly differ for a clinical trait. Differential linear regression models were set up by inclusion of age and sex as covariates of no interest, at a minimum of 50 random permutations.

Results

Judgment accuracies in the gender decision task for facial expressions were evaluated as the percentage of correct answers in each of the 6 categories (for each happy and sad, neutral, mild, intense). Correct overall answers were 49.54% for DPRD and 51.31% for controls. These rates are in line with other studies that have utilized implicit facial paradigms.Reference Surguladze, Brammer and Keedwell 28 No systematic differences between DPRD and NC emerged for reaction times and response accuracy.

The internal consistencies for the Dissociative Experience Scale, the Screening for Somatoform Disorders, the Beck Depression Inventory, and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (DES α = 0.965, SOMS α = 0.783, BDI α = 0.779, STAI Y1 α = 0.919, STAI Y2 α = 0.815) were satisfactory for subsequent analyses. We attempted to predict clinical DSM diagnoses of DPRD by each of these scales. Logistic regression was used to model the linear relationships between BDI, SOMS, DES, and STAI Y1 and Y2, and clinical diagnoses. ROC were utilized to assess the classification sensitivity of the self-report scales with respect to psychiatric diagnosis.

The results are presented in Table 1. Each of the tested personality trait scales was able to predict the clinical DPRD diagnosis, and each also demonstrated sufficient classification specificity for the clinical diagnosis. Both the BDI and SOMS scales have unique variance contributions >50% for the clinical diagnosis, and have areas under the curve >80%. The DES, STAI Y1, and STAI Y2 scales still yield significant regression models; however, in comparison, they are less potent regressors, but are still valid classifiers for clinical diagnosis of DPRD.

Table 1

Prediction of clinical DPRD diagnosis with scales of personality traits: logistic regression and areas under the ROC curves

Note: N = 21.

Under stimulation with happy facial expressions (Table 2A, Figure 2 left panel, Figure 3), regions significantly discriminating between the DPD and NC groups were we follows: for somatization severity, the right temporal operculum; for dissociative experience, the right supramarginal gyrus (BA 40); for depression load, the left pulvinar nucleus of the thalamus; for state anxiety level, the left inferior frontal gyrus (BA 45); and for trait anxiety level, the right caput of the caudate nucleus. During processing of sad faces (Table 2B, Figure 2 right panel, Figure 4), DPRD and NC groups differed significantly in the following regions: for somatization, bilateral ventral striatum adjacent to the subgenual cortices (BA 25); for dissociation, the left inferior temporal gyrus (BA 36); for depression, the left amygdala; for state anxiety level, the left parahippocampal gyrus (BA 28); and for trait anxiety level, the right superior temporal gyrus (BA 22).

Table 2A

Comparison of regression slopes: depersonalization disorder > normal control subjects

Note: Mass = volume in mm3, BA = Brodmann Area, XYZ = Talairach coordinates, P-Value tested against 50 random permutations.

Figure 2

Discriminative regions for somatization. Neurological convention. Left panel, right temporal operculum (BA 22), differential region for happy facial expression. Right panel, bilateral ventral striatum, differential region for sad facial expression of emotion.

Figure 3

Differential regions of other traits in happy emotion condition. Radiological convention. (a) Left pulvinar nucleus of the thalamus (BDI, depression); (b) right supramarginal gyrus (DES, dissociation); (c) left inferior frontal gyrus (BA 45) (STAI Y1, state anxiety); (d) right caput caudatis (STAI Y2, trait anxiety).

Table 2B

Comparison of regression slopes: depersonalization disorder > normal control subjects

Note: Mass = volume in mm3, BA = Brodmann Area, XYZ = Talairach coordinates, P-Value tested against 50 random permutations.

Figure 4

Discriminative regions of other traits in sad emotion condition. Radiological convention. (a) left amygdala (BDI, depression); (b) left inferior temporal gyrus (BA 36) (DES, dissociation); (c) left parahippocampal gyrus (BA 28) (STAI Y1, state anxiety); (d) right superior temporal gyrus (BA 22) (STAI Y2, trait anxiety).

Discussion

We aimed to examine the potential neural mechanisms underlying DPRD with respect to the cerebral bases of the traits of depression, anxiety, dissociation, and somatization in relation to normal controls. Using a whole-brain correlational neuroimaging approach, we ascertained the cerebral correlates of these traits as elicited by tasks of facial emotion processing. The main findings in the behavioral domain were the following: the strongest predictors for DPRD diagnosis were depression severity, then somatization severity. Although trait dissociation is also a significant predictor of DPRD, its classification specificity is considerably lower than depression and somatization.

In the neural domain, our results indicate that there are dissociable cerebral bases subserving each of the personality traits in the 2 emotion conditions. For depression, the regions that significantly discern the 2 experimental groups were the thalamus and the amygdala under happy and sad stimulation, respectively. These results are consistent with previous findings that have implicated these limbic structures in depression. For trait somatization, the regions that significantly discriminated between the 2 experimental groups were the temporal operculum in the happy condition and the bilateral ventral striatum in the sad condition. These findings support the notion that trait somatization complaints could follow neural representations of interoception, and they support accumulating evidence that somatization is serotoninergically mediated. The differential association clusters of dissociation were located in the supramarginal and inferior temporal cortices, respectively, which is consistent with our a priori hypotheses. The association of state anxiety with the neural response in the inferior frontal gyrus to happy faces and the parahippocampal gyrus to sad faces replicates published literature for anxiety in affective disorders.Reference Osuch, Ketter and Kimbrell 29 The discriminative regions for trait anxiety are the caudate head and the superior temporal gyrus. This finding also replicates previous findings for anxiety, although these were observed for state anxiety.Reference Chua, Krams, Toni, Passingham and Dolan 20

We will briefly discuss our discriminative regions in the light of recent findings. The operculum is known for its role in unpleasant somatosensation, pain conditioning, and memory retrieval.Reference Ushida, Ikemoto and Tanaka 30 A particular role of the operculum in happiness has been found in smile and laughter processing.Reference Hennenlotter, Schroeder and Erhard 31 The ventral striatum has been demonstrated to constitute the valence appraisal regulatory system,Reference Mitterschiffthaler, Fu, Dalton, Andrew and Williams 32 as it is sensitive to the whole content of the face. Because compassion and sad affects encompass social reward, ventral striatal activity is often found in reversal of the normal pattern.Reference Lee, Seong Whi and Hyung Soo 33 The pulvinar nucleus of the thalamus, which is anatomically connected to the amygdala and orbitofrontal cortex,Reference Blaizot, Mansilla and Insausti 34 is part of the fast-track route that conveys low-frequency facial processing.Reference Vuilleumier, Armony, Driver and Dolan 35 It has been demonstrated to play a key role in the suppression of emotional memory, specifically in reappraisal and suppression of negative emotions.Reference Goldin, McRae, Ramel and Gross 36 Amygdalar correlation is frequently seen in association studies with scales that measure depression.Reference Peluso, Glahn and Matsuo 37 As an indicator for depressive trait vulnerability, amygdalar connectivity with orbitofrontal cortices has been observed to be altered by sad stimulation.Reference Versace, Thompson and Zhou 38 Essential for visuospatial processing, the supramarginal gyrus has been recognized as a key region for happy facial expression processing.Reference Phillips, Bullmore and Howard 39 More recent findings have indicated that the supramarginal gyrus is specifically active in positive word recognition,Reference Hofer, Siedentopf and Ischebeck 40 as well as emotion attribution in normal controls.Reference Sommer, Sodian and Döhnel 41 The lower portion (BA 36) of the inferior temporal gyrus has been implicated in emotion reappraisal.Reference Winecoff, Labar, Madden, Cabeza and Huettel 42 A key role seems to be in valence discrimination and in ambiguity evaluation in nonsalient emotion signals.Reference Leitman, Wolf and Ragland 43 The ventrolateral prefrontal cortex has been found to be central to compassion toward others.Reference Longe, Maratos and Gilbert 44 This also explains its role in negative emotional rumination.Reference Keedwell, Drapier and Surguladze 45 The parahippocampal gyrus has been implicated in impaired emotion regulation. Specifically, it has been found in positive emotion suppression, but has been described as part of the reward circuit,Reference Colibazzi, Posner and Wang 46 along with the caudate and ventral striatum. The caudate head has been implicated in familiarity processing in smile perception.Reference Vrticka, Andersson, Sander and Vuilleumier 47 As part of the motivational control system, it showed inverse correlation with extraversion in happiness states.Reference Suslow, Kugel and Reber 48 The superior temporal gyrus (STG) is a key region in human face processing; because of this, it becomes active as a basis of the familiarity bias in sad emotional memories.Reference Sergerie, Lepage and Armony 49 Modulation of the STG is seen by exposure to sad faces during tryptophan depletion,Reference Daly, Deeley and Hallahan 50 but also during sadness states induced by nonfacial stimuli.Reference Goldin, Hutcherson and Ochsner 51

Limitations

Although this sample comprises a cross-sectional patient sample distributed countrywide, the absolute number of patients should always be regarded with caution. The nonparametric and permutation based inference software should, however, be safe against inflation of coefficients and reflect brain bases with precision. It cannot be excluded that the weighting of the traits (eg, depression) could be biased by comorbidity, although the minor weight of anxiety would speak against assumption of a comorbidity bias. In contrast, the potency of somatization, documented here for the first time, could emphasize the possible consequences of traumaReference van der Kolk, Pelcovitz and Roth 5 in the etiology of DPRD. Due to the lack of trauma data in this sample, however, a final conclusion for this finding is not yet feasible. Finally, it can be regarded as a limitation that not a structured interview for (such as Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Dissociative Disorders (SCID-D)) was employed. However, DSM diagnostic criteria were applied by 2 expert clinicians for this disorder independently.

Conclusion and Recommendations

In sum, the neuroimaging results suggest that DPRD patients may employ abnormal emotion regulation mechanisms, as indicated by the finding that differential regions are structures concerned with cognitive processing of emotion perception, appraisal, and rumination. This implies that DPRD patients may be occupied with cognitive processing and reflection of emotion signals, as a correlate of emotional dampening in this group. Regarding our directions for future research endeavors, we would recommend that a direct comparison of other clinical groups, as mentioned here, would be beneficial in further efforts to clarify the nosological status of DPRD.

Disclosures

The authors do not have anything to disclose.

Supplementary Material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1092852913000588.

Footnotes

We thank The Wellcome Trust, ARC Programme, and The Pilkington Family Trust for support of this work.

References

1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2013.Google Scholar
2. Mula, M, Pini, S, Cassano, GB. The neurobiology and clinical significance of depersonalization in mood and anxiety. J Affect Disord. 2007; 99(1–3): 91–99.Google Scholar
3. Yargic, LI, Sar, V, Tutkun, H, Alyanak, B. Comparison of dissociative identity disorder with other diagnostic groups. Compr Psychiatry. 1998; 39(6): 345–351.Google Scholar
4. Rief, W, Auer, C. Cortisol and somatization. Biol Psychol. 2000; 53(1): 13–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. van der Kolk, BA, Pelcovitz, D, Roth, S, etal. Dissociation, somatization, and affect dysregulation: the complexity of adaptation of trauma. Am J Psychiatry. 1996; 153(7 suppl): 83–93.Google Scholar
6. Rief, W, Broadbent, E. Explaining medically unexplained symptoms—models and mechanisms. Clin Psychol Rev. 2007; 27(7): 821–841.Google Scholar
7. Hennings, A, Zill, P, Rief, W. Serotonin transporter gene promoter polymorphism and somatoform symptoms. J Clin Psychiatry. 2009; 70(11): 1536–1539.Google Scholar
8. Lemche, E, Giampietro, VP, Brammer, MJ, etal. Somatization severity associated with postero-medial complex structures. Sci Rep. 2012; 3: 1032.Google Scholar
9. Frewen, PA, Lanius, RA, Dozois, DJ, etal. Clinical and neural correlates of alexithymia in posttraumatic stress disorder. J Abnorm Psychol. 2008; 117(1): 171–181.Google Scholar
10. Mula, M, Pini, S, Calugi, S, etal. Validity and reliability of the Structured Clinical Interview for Depersonalization-Derealization Spectrum (SCI-DER). Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2008; 4(5): 977–986.Google Scholar
11. de Ruiter, MB, Veltman, DJ, Phaf, RH, van Dyck, R. Negative words enhance recognition in nonclinical high dissociators: an fMRI study. Neuroimage. 2007; 37(1): 323–334.Google Scholar
12. Choi, J, Jeong, B, Rohan, ML, Polcari, AM, Teicher, MH. Preliminary evidence for white matter tract abnormalities in young adults exposed to parental verbal abuse. Biol Psychiatry. 2009; 65(3): 227–234.Google Scholar
13. Lanius, RA, Vermetten, E, Loewenstein, RJ, etal. Emotion modulation in PTSD: clinical and neurobiological evidence for a dissociative subtype. Am J Psychiatry. 2010; 167(6): 640–647.Google Scholar
14. Felmingham, K, Kemp, AH, Williams, L, etal. Dissociative responses to conscious and non-conscious fear impact underlying brain function in post-traumatic stress disorder. Psychol Med. 2008; 38(12): 1771–1780.Google Scholar
15. Lemche, E, Surguladze, SA, Giampietro, VP, etal. Limbic and prefrontal responses to facial emotion expressions in depersonalization. Neuroreport. 2007; 18(5): 473–477.Google Scholar
16. Mayberg, HS. Defining the neural circuitry of depression: toward a new nosology with therapeutic implications. Biol Psychiatry. 2007; 61(6): 729–730.Google Scholar
17. Phillips, ML, Ladouceur, CD, Drevets, WC. A neural model of voluntary and automatic emotion regulation: implications for understanding the pathophysiology and neurodevelopment of bipolar disorder. Mol Psychiatry. 2008; 13(9): 829, 833–857.Google Scholar
18. Knyazev, GG, Savostyanov, AN, Levin, EA. Alpha oscillations as a correlate of trait anxiety. Int J Psychophysiol. 2004; 53(2): 147–160.Google Scholar
19. Etkin, A, Klemenhagen, KC, Dudman, JT, etal. Individual differences in trait anxiety predict the response of the basolateral amygdala to unconsciously processed fearful faces. Neuron. 2004; 44(6): 1043–1055.Google Scholar
20. Chua, P, Krams, M, Toni, I, Passingham, R, Dolan, R. A functional anatomy of anticipatory anxiety. Neuroimage. 1999; 9(6 pt 1): 563–571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21. World Medical Association. Code of Ethics: Declaration of Helsinki. 2013; www.wma.net/en/10home/index.html Google Scholar
22. Sierra, M, Berrios, GE. The Cambridge Depersonalization Scale. Psychiatry Res. 2000; 93(2): 153–164.Google Scholar
23. Oldfield, RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia. 1971; 7: 97–113.Google Scholar
24. Beck, AT, Ward, CH, Mendelson, M, Mock, J, Erbaugh, J. An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1961; 4: 561–571.Google Scholar
25. Spielberger, CD. Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1983.Google Scholar
26. Bernstein-Carlson, EM, Putnam, FW. Development, reliability and validity of a dissociation scale. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1986; 174(12): 727–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Rief, W, Hiller, W, Heuser, J. SOMS: The Screening for Somatoform Disorders. Berne, Switzerland: Hans Huber Verlag; 1997.Google Scholar
28. Surguladze, S, Brammer, MJ, Keedwell, P, etal. A differential pattern of neural response toward sad versus happy facial expressions in major depressive disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 2005; 57(3): 201–209.Google Scholar
29. Osuch, EA, Ketter, TA, Kimbrell, TA, etal. Regional cerebral metabolism associated with anxiety symptoms in affective disorder patients. Biol Psychiatry. 2000; 48(10): 1020–1023.Google Scholar
30. Ushida, T, Ikemoto, T, Tanaka, S, etal. Virtual needle pain stimuli activates cortical representation of emotions in normal volunteers. Neurosci Lett. 2008; 439(1): 7–12.Google Scholar
31. Hennenlotter, A, Schroeder, U, Erhard, P, etal. A common neural basis for receptive and expressive communication of pleasant facial affect. Neuroimage. 2005; 26(2): 581–591.Google Scholar
32. Mitterschiffthaler, MT, Fu, CH, Dalton, JA, Andrew, CM, Williams, SC. A functional MRI study of happy and sad affective states induced by classical music. Hum Brain Mapp. 2007; 28(11): 1150–1162.Google Scholar
33. Lee, BT, Seong Whi, C, Hyung Soo, K, etal. The neural substrates of affective processing toward positive and negative affective pictures in patients with major depressive disorder. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2007; 31(7): 1487–1492.Google Scholar
34. Blaizot, X, Mansilla, F, Insausti, AM, etal. The human parahippocampal region: I. temporal pole cytoarchitectonic and MRI correlation. Cereb Cortex. 2010; 20(9): 2198–2212.Google Scholar
35. Vuilleumier, P, Armony, JL, Driver, J, Dolan, RJ. Distinct spatial frequency sensitivities for processing faces and emotional expressions. Nat Neurosci. 2003; 6(6): 624–631.Google Scholar
36. Goldin, PR, McRae, K, Ramel, W, Gross, JJ. The neural bases of emotion regulation: reappraisal and suppression of negative emotion. Biol Psychiatry. 2008; 63(6): 577–586.Google Scholar
37. Peluso, MA, Glahn, DC, Matsuo, K, etal. Amygdala hyperactivation in untreated depressed individuals. Psychiatry Res. 2009; 173(2): 158–161.Google Scholar
38. Versace, A, Thompson, WK, Zhou, D, etal. Abnormal left and right amygdala-orbitofrontal cortical functional connectivity to emotional faces: state versus trait vulnerability markers of depression in bipolar disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 2010; 67(5): 422–431.Google Scholar
39. Phillips, ML, Bullmore, ET, Howard, R, etal. Investigation of facial recognition memory and happy and sad facial expression perception. Psychiatry Res. 1998; 83(3): 127–138.Google Scholar
40. Hofer, A, Siedentopf, CM, Ischebeck, A, etal. Sex differences in brain activation patterns during processing of positively and negatively valenced emotional words. Psychol Med. 2007; 37(1): 109–119.Google Scholar
41. Sommer, M, Sodian, B, Döhnel, K, etal. In psychopathic patients emotion attribution modulates activity in outcome-related brain areas. Psychiatry Res. 2010; 182(2): 88–95.Google Scholar
42. Winecoff, A, Labar, KS, Madden, DJ, Cabeza, R, Huettel, SA. Cognitive and neural contributors to emotion regulation in aging. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2011; 6(2): 165–176.Google Scholar
43. Leitman, DI, Wolf, DH, Ragland, JD, etal. “It's not what you say, but how you say it”: a reciprocal temporo-frontal network for affective prosody. Front Hum Neurosci. 2010; 4: 19.Google Scholar
44. Longe, O, Maratos, FA, Gilbert, P, etal. Having a word with yourself: neural correlates of self-criticism and self-reassurance. Neuroimage. 2010; 49(2): 1849–1856.Google Scholar
45. Keedwell, PA, Drapier, D, Surguladze, S, etal. Subgenual cingulate and visual cortex responses to sad faces predict clinical outcome during antidepressant treatment for depression. J Affect Disord. 2010; 120(1–3): 120–125.Google Scholar
46. Colibazzi, T, Posner, J, Wang, Z, etal. Neural systems subserving valence and arousal during the experience of induced emotions. Emotion. 2010; 10(3): 377–389.Google Scholar
47. Vrticka, P, Andersson, F, Sander, D, Vuilleumier, P. Memory for friends or foes: the social context of past encounters with faces modulates their subsequent neural traces in the brain. Soc Neurosci. 2009; 4(5): 384–401.Google Scholar
48. Suslow, T, Kugel, H, Reber, H, etal. Automatic brain response to facial emotion as a function of implicitly and explicitly measured extraversion. Neuroscience. 2010; 167(1): 111–123.Google Scholar
49. Sergerie, K, Lepage, M, Armony, JL. Influence of emotional expression on memory recognition bias. Biol Psychiatry. 2007; 62(10): 1126–1133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
50. Daly, E, Deeley, Q, Hallahan, B, etal. Effects of acute tryptophan depletion on neural processing of facial expressions of emotion in humans. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2010; 210(4): 499–510.Google Scholar
51. Goldin, PR, Hutcherson, CA, Ochsner, KN, etal. The neural bases of amusement and sadness: a comparison of block contrast and subject-specific emotion intensity regression approaches. Neuroimage. 2005; 27(1): 26–36.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1 Presentation design for fast implicit facial expression task. Facial expressions were excerpted from the POFA set of photographs, courtesy of Dr. Paul Ekman, professor emeritus University of California at San Francisco (written permission from paul.ekman.com of January 2013).

Figure 1

Table 1 Prediction of clinical DPRD diagnosis with scales of personality traits: logistic regression and areas under the ROC curves

Figure 2

Table 2A Comparison of regression slopes: depersonalization disorder > normal control subjects

Figure 3

Figure 2 Discriminative regions for somatization. Neurological convention. Left panel, right temporal operculum (BA 22), differential region for happy facial expression. Right panel, bilateral ventral striatum, differential region for sad facial expression of emotion.

Figure 4

Figure 3 Differential regions of other traits in happy emotion condition. Radiological convention. (a) Left pulvinar nucleus of the thalamus (BDI, depression); (b) right supramarginal gyrus (DES, dissociation); (c) left inferior frontal gyrus (BA 45) (STAI Y1, state anxiety); (d) right caput caudatis (STAI Y2, trait anxiety).

Figure 5

Table 2B Comparison of regression slopes: depersonalization disorder > normal control subjects

Figure 6

Figure 4 Discriminative regions of other traits in sad emotion condition. Radiological convention. (a) left amygdala (BDI, depression); (b) left inferior temporal gyrus (BA 36) (DES, dissociation); (c) left parahippocampal gyrus (BA 28) (STAI Y1, state anxiety); (d) right superior temporal gyrus (BA 22) (STAI Y2, trait anxiety).

Supplementary material: File

Lemche Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material

Download Lemche Supplementary Material(File)
File 578 KB